Manned versus unmanned airliners

I can already picture the low-cost flights of tomorrow: no pilot, no seating, no food or beverages, charge toilet, pay per kilo luggage... Gimme a Ford Trimotor's drafts, hosiery seats and Wasp engines instead! ;D
 
"Gimme a Ford Trimotor's drafts, hosiery seats and Wasp engines instead! "

That's pure decadence, someone, who can afford that, can fly with 3 seats for himself
and a dozen bottles of champagne in the first class !
But the only new point of your "flights of tomorrow" would be the pilotless cockpit.
Standing while flying is seriously considered by several airlines. Toilet charge ? Just google
Ryanair. The maximum weight of luggage, which is free of charge was already reduced by most
airlines. But flying is considered by many not as a privilege any more, but as a part of their
fundamental right to bother the most distant places in the world, so in the end nearly everything
will be accepted, if the price is low enough. "Geiz ist geil" (Penury is cool) is an often used say
in Germany.
And as Franz wrote: It's all a matter familiarisation, who wants an operator in a lift ?
And when the next strike by pilots and cabin personal, or the next "human error" induced accident
is due, we shouldn't be surprised to hear thoughts about the advantages of a pilotless cockpit.

And although even a pilotless aircraft would be monitored all the way from a ground station, probably
only take-off and landing would require constant attention by the operators. So they probably could
handle several aircraft without difficulty and a team of "groundbased pilots" could replace not just one,
but several oldfashioned crews. Probably a very real cost factor for an airline. And hi-jacking such an
aircraft would be much harder, too (Hopefully, don't want to add a discussion of the latest hacker attacks
on drones) !
Great advantages, that make persuading those pax still behind their times really worthwhile ! ;)
 
An extreme take on 'unmanned':

http://www.dvice.com/2013-6-27/meet-horizon-system-clip-airs-worst-nightmare

http://www.core77.com/blog/transportation/flotspotting_u_of_glasgow_teams_horizon_modular_airplane_system_looks_even_better_than_the_clip-air_25120.asp

http://player.vimeo.com/video/64302638
 
Well, 2050 still is quite a while away, so maybe Horizon actually wouldn' use energy from
fossil fuels and technologies are advanced enough to allow for much longer times without
maintenance. And if the world population has decreased sufficiently, it may be possible to
use those enormous ares, that obviously are needed to release the outgoing and pick up the
ingoing cars. But with those advances, why isn't Horizon VTOL ? ???
 
Maybe unmanned Freight aircraft would be a good first step in this direction:


20130731180532-fed.png
 
This might have been hotly debated before, but now that we know Asiana pilots and others from that country with years of flying, have in fact "minutes" of actual flying time and man years of "autopilot" time, I would rather take my chances with a robo-pilot than a real pilot....
 
From what I know, military pilots practising extreme low flying were the first to expeirence
the pleasure of fully automated flying. AFAIK, during Nap-of-the-earth flying, for example
the Tornado pulls up later before obstacles, than the pilot could do. So there has to be full
confidence into technology.
 
The only real barrier appears to be psychological. Unmanned freight aircraft I can easily imagine because we accept drones, and we don't care how our stuff gets delivered so long as it's on time.

However, we may be seeing a generational shift. Autonomous cars are coming soon, and a lot of digital natives think of cars as appliances rather than vehicles and I think that some polls I've seen asking "iPod or car?" increasingly favour iPods. The sort of people who will buy self-driving iCars and take their safety for granted while they immerse themselves in social media will probably feel LESS secure in a plane that requires constant human control.

Anyway, not my generation... so I'm happier in a piloted plane knowing that the pilot is heavily assisted.

There's an old joke from the days when crews shifted from three to two: In the future, planes will have crews consisting of a pilot and a dog. The pilot's job will be to feed the dog and the dog's job will be to bite the pilot if they try to fly the plane.
 
I have to say that I will not get on a pilotless aircraft. My children might, and my grandchildren will giggle at silly people who dressed funny and HAD to drive the air vehicle. Getting on piloted aircraft will be like taking a ride on a steam train. Nostalgic.

Then I did spend a good part of my adult life as a pilot, so I have certain point of view.
 
http://gizmodo.com/u-s-pilots-forget-how-to-fly-manually-says-department-1752668219
 
Well, honestly these days, you don't need an aircrew ... until you do. As long as the "O's and 1's" don't get jumbled everything is fine.
 
As the man said who fell from the Empire State Building, passing the 30th floor on the way down - 'So far, so good!'
 
There will be several challenges initially. Market acceptance being the first one. Second will be the potential for litigation against the airline or the aircraft developer when uncrewed aircraft are induced to crash or have misplaced O's and 1's that cause the same.

That said I suppose by the end of the Century there will be more acceptance of getting on an aircraft flown by "R2D2". I will be beyond caring by then.
 
What people don't understand they fear...I think this sums up a lot of the challenge here.
 
Stargazer2006 said:
I can already picture the low-cost flights of tomorrow: no pilot, no seating, no food or beverages, charge toilet, pay per kilo luggage... Gimme a Ford Trimotor's drafts, hosiery seats and Wasp engines instead! ;D
Click to expand...
Hey!
Quit knocking Ford Trimotors.
I have made a single skydive out of a Ford Trimotor and rather enjoyed it The most enjoyable part was being able to stand on my hind legs like a gentleman as I walked towards the door.
The only modern(?) jump plane that can compare is Shorts’ Skyvan.
 
Last edited:
blackkite said:
Re: JAXA next-gen SST

Hi GTX! I think pilot induced accidents are very rare. I think the reasons of air accidents are as follows.
1.Structural or equipment design problem including software problem.
2.engine trouble.
2.Bad weather.
3.Bird strike.
4.Shot down.
5.Bad maintenance.
6.Control tower mistake.
7.Terrorism.
8.Volcanic cloud.
I think all pilots have enough skill and have very strong intention to keep passengers life.
Flying is very special action,far from surface travel.
Click to expand...
Yes, pilots do have a strong will to survive, BUT during an emergency they need to apply complex skills that they may have only practiced in a simulator and that practice was many months ago and they were not buffeted or scared during the simulator check-ride.
As soon as fear and adrenaline kick in, complex motor skills deteriorate dramatically.
 
Jemiba said:
It's just a question of public relations ("Do YOU want to die, because of a pilots error ??")
and of course of the price. Tell the people, that only for more expensive flights, the carrier
can actually afford to keep the crew on board, subtly stating, that it isn't the pilot either,
who flies the aircraft. And of course, to accustom the pax, the first thing, that has to be
abandoned is the stewardess. Self-service for drinks and meals and it won't take long, that
nobody will ask for a crew !
("Oh my dear, this year we'll having a flight with a REAL crew ! Well, he's eventually got his pay
rise and now we can afford it.")
Click to expand...
Do you plan for an automated rinks cart to roll up and down the aisle on its own? What happens to the slow, clumsy, stupid passenger that gets in the way of the drinks cart?
 
Rhinocrates said:
The only real barrier appears to be psychological. Unmanned freight aircraft I can easily imagine because we accept drones, and we don't care how our stuff gets delivered so long as it's on time.

However, we may be seeing a generational shift. Autonomous cars are coming soon, and a lot of digital natives think of cars as appliances rather than vehicles and I think that some polls I've seen asking "iPod or car?" increasingly favour iPods. The sort of people who will buy self-driving iCars and take their safety for granted while they immerse themselves in social media will probably feel LESS secure in a plane that requires constant human control.

Anyway, not my generation... so I'm happier in a piloted plane knowing that the pilot is heavily assisted.

There's an old joke from the days when crews shifted from three to two: In the future, planes will have crews consisting of a pilot and a dog. The pilot's job will be to feed the dog and the dog's job will be to bite the pilot if they try to fly the plane.
Click to expand...
Judging from what I see on the streets of Vancouver, dozens of drivers are more interested in their mobile phones than the traffic around them. At every third traffic light, you see a driver stopped at a red light with his/her/their nose buried deep in their cell phone. Despite fines for using cell phones - in the driver’s seat exceeding $150 per offence. The third time you get caught texting while driving, you lose your license for a few months.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom